Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
Ive said the exact same thing, and the answer has always been uncomfortable mumbling about how its more complicated than that without elaboration.
It's mostly that male and female muscle structure and fat distribution, combined with hormonal differences, even at the same weight class simply aren't the same. A 125 lbs. male and 125 lbs. female are not fundamentally built the same even at the same general level of fitness. So if you throw them both in a Featherweight boxing ring it's not gonna be a fair matchup.

Fat distribution alone makes weight control more of a nightmare for female athletes. You see that even in women's MMA and other combat sports. Male athletes can afford to cut and dehydrate a lot more before a match and maintain a higher muscle volume and lower fat content overall, pass weigh-in, and then rehydrate before the match. Testosterone promotes weight loss and muscle growth on top of that, making it even easier. It still sucks, but if you're only cutting down one weight class it's usually not life threatening.

Female athletes can do the same but it is more grueling and even more life threatening (and it's already incredibly unsafe for male athletes cutting to the next lowest weight class) just because female fat distribution is different and much harder to cut down to the same levels.

Due to this even at the same weight class a male athlete is generally going to have an advantage; they'll punch harder and have more stamina, even before you take into account that the male athlete is probably going to be a bit taller and have more reach as well.

And now someone might come in and say "Well don't let people cut down to a different weight class"...and that causes even more issues. If the weight limit for eg. Middleweight is 155-160 lbs., then someone who is naturally at 155 lbs. is going to struggle a lot. Bulking up by 5 lbs. is arguably harder and less healthy than cutting down by 5 lbs. (especially if half of it is water weight) and still isn't going to offset the disadvantages that people at a natural 160 lbs. or more are usually going to be taller, broader, and have more reach. That's why athletes tend to cut down to the next nearest weight class.

This is pure and simple exercise science. I've approached this primarily from a combat sports angle because that's where "weight classes" are usually a thing, but it applies to all other sports as well. Track and field is a good angle to look at it from as well. You can take a look at how the world record times for eg. the 100 meter dash stack up across male and female athletes. Female athletes don't stack up anywhere close in that regard.

Games of skill tend to be evenly matched, but those games don't tend to have weight classes anyway. There's no reason for there to be a "Men's Open" and "Women's Open" for like...billiards and chess for example and we'd definitely be better doing away with them IMO.